Nearly two-thirds of adult Americans, and a growing percentage in many other developed countries, are overweight or obese. Despite the attention of healthcare professionals, the media and the public at large, the problem keeps getting worse. One of the major factors in the kind of unhealthy eating that can lead to weight gain is the busy lifestyles of an always-on-the-go public, in which every activity, including eating, is now rushed.
To combat weight gain and obesity, many people turn to dieting, which might involve allocating less food for a meal, buying diet-sized special meals, counting calories, taking pills, or other less than pleasurable attempts at stemming weight gain.
However, one of the most successful methods of losing weight through dieting is to control the portion of food one consumes. Although exercise and the type of foods eaten can aid with weight loss, controlling the amount of food eaten over a given period of time can have a dramatic impact on one's weight.
Scientific studies have shown that there is, on average, a 15-20 minute delay between the stomach reaching capacity and the eater feeling full. This delay in the signals of fullness reaching the brain has prompted many recommendations for dieters to slow down their eating in order to achieve a sense of satiety before more food than necessary is consumed.
Studies have shown that eating more slowly can result in multiple health benefits, including better digestion of food (less indigestion), less hormonal stress on the body, increased pleasure in the dining experience, and a decrease in caloric intake due to the brain having time to “catch up” with the stomach's sense of satiety or fullness.
The benefits of exercising portion control by eating more slowing have been known for some time, and as such, several prior art devices have been suggested for providing the user some feedback mechanism for timing the duration between bites in an attempt to delay each bite, with the goal of slowing down the overall eating process.
Past attempts to provide some sort of feedback mechanism for pausing between bites have been proposed, including sensors that measure hand movement, and utensils with built-in visual or audible indicators and predetermined delays that inform the user when to take a bite and when to refrain.
The following is a tabulation of some prior art that presently appears relevant:U.S. patent application PublicationsPublicationKindPublicationNumberCodeDateApplicant4,207,673A1980 Jul. 17DiGirolamo,DiGirolamo4,218,611A1980 Aug. 19Cannon4,914,819A1990 Apr. 10Ash4,975,682A1990 Dec. 4Kerr, Rott5,421,089A1995 Jun. 6Dubus, Springfield20120115111A12005 May 10LePine20090253105A12009 Oct. 8LePine20100109876A12010 May 6Schmid-Schonbein,Altshuler, Gorish,Sukhija, Williams,Wu20100240962A12010 Sep. 23Contant7,855,936B22010 Dec. 21Czarnek, Aruffo20110091841A12011 Apr. 21Orlinsky, Orlinsky,Spiegel, SpiegelForeign Patent DocumentsForeignCountryKindDoc. Nr. CodeCodePub. DatePatentee2,023,780EPB12009 Dec. 30 Lepine2009105849WOA22009 Sep. 3KimWhile these devices meet various objectives in their attempt to get the user to slow down their eating, I have determined that several disadvantages still remain in the way heretofore known portion control devices are implemented and used, namely:
(a) Hand motion detectors can falsely trigger, as the users hand might be bringing a class of water to their mouth instead of a fork-full of food.
(b) Utensils containing visual/audible indicators triggered at pre-determined time intervals fail to take into account differing eating styles and the fact that users new to slowing down their eating may need to “ease into” longer delays.
(c) Utensils with built-in delay circuitry, when used in public environments such as restaurants, may also be difficult to store after a meal, since the soiled utensil is either a permanent fixture of the device, or a custom utensil head that only works with the device.
(d) Devices with built-in utensils also carry the additional burden and expense of being water-proof so that the utensil end can be properly cleaned.
(e) Devices that include the utensil or that contain more complex circuitry are more expensive to manufacture and may be more cost-prohibitive to the average consumer, who may just be looking for a simple tool to help them establish proper portion control.